A Gremlin in space

July 14, 2005

After 2 1/2 years of planning and preparation, not to mention far more than the usual preflight fanfare, the launch of the space shuttle Discovery was scrapped on Wednesday, the victim of a faulty sensor.

Why are we not surprised?

This was to be the first flight since the fiery disintegration of the shuttle Columbia in early 2003, and NASA has labored mightily to prove it has learned its lessons about safety. Yet even before that, as Discovery sat on the launch pad, a temporary protective cover for one of its windows fell and damaged two heat-resistant tiles.

Those glitches, though minor, are eerily symbolic of the troubles that have plagued the shuttle program since its inception.

Still, Discovery will be launched. And whenever it happens, it will mark the beginning of the final chapter for the shuttle program, which is set to end in 2010.

It is a chapter that should not be written. The shuttle, a relic of the 1970s-era of Gremlins and leisure suits, should be retired now.

Above all, safety is the issue. The panel that investigated the crash of the Columbia made 15 specific recommendations of changes that were necessary before the shuttle returned to flight. NASA failed to complete three of them. Those were critical tasks, including the capability to repair in space any damage that might occur. NASA is still testing patching kits.

It's worth remembering that in some sensitive areas such as the wing's leading edge, a crack as small as 1/20,000th of an inch could cause catastrophic damage on re-entry.

Given those fine tolerances, it's no wonder that Adm. Harold Gehman, the head of the Columbia accident board, said: "I'm sure that this next flight will be safer than the previous ones. (But) by any measure of safe, this is not safe."

NASA chief administrator Michael Griffin is equally blunt. He said the shuttle, even after 113 launches, "is still an experimental test flight program."

Of course, everyone knows that flying the shuttle carries considerable risk. The question is whether the shuttle's mission is of such scientific or exploratory value that it is worth that risk of life. The answer is no. In the headlong rush to fix the shuttle and return it to flight, NASA has yet to offer a clear and compelling scientific reason why the shuttle must fly again. Yes, there's the International Space Station and, yes, we promised the Europeans and others to help build it, using the shuttle. But events have changed. They'll get over it.

This is not to dismiss the courage of the astronauts or the skills of the engineers at NASA. Manned space travel still has tremendous appeal. But NASA has shown a flair for doing great things at far less expense with satellites, space telescopes and other unmanned probes. Wasting billions more--and risking lives--on the shuttle and space station is unconscionable.